QEFA vs. CIL

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF (QEFA) and VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL).

QEFA and CIL are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. QEFA is a passively managed fund by State Street that tracks the performance of the MSCI EAFE Factor Mix A-Series (USD). It was launched on Jun 4, 2014. CIL is a passively managed fund by Crestview that tracks the performance of the Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. It was launched on Aug 19, 2015. Both QEFA and CIL are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

QEFA vs. CIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF (QEFA) and VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

QEFA vs. CIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QEFA SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF	2.87%	29.25%	2.27%	17.40%	-14.03%	12.50%	6.76%	21.91%	-10.39%	24.03%
CIL VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF	5.44%	32.99%	3.76%	16.29%	-16.00%	11.07%	7.21%	19.13%	-13.34%	27.67%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QEFA achieves a 2.87% return, which is significantly lower than CIL's 5.44% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with QEFA having a 8.65% annualized return and CIL not far behind at 8.47%.

QEFA

• 1D: 2.37%
• 1M: -6.51%
• YTD: 2.87%
• 6M: 7.62%
• 1Y: 22.10%
• 3Y*: 13.86%
• 5Y*: 8.19%
• 10Y*: 8.65%

CIL

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 5.44%
• 6M: 10.80%
• 1Y: 29.06%
• 3Y*: 16.16%
• 5Y*: 8.79%
• 10Y*: 8.47%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QEFA vs. CIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

QEFA has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than CIL's 0.45% expense ratio.

CIL

VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF

QEFA

SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF

Return for Risk

QEFA vs. CIL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

QEFA

QEFA Risk / Return Rank: 80
QEFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
QEFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
QEFA Omega Ratio Rank: 78
QEFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
QEFA Martin Ratio Rank: 80

CIL

CIL Risk / Return Rank: 92
CIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
CIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
CIL Omega Ratio Rank: 96
CIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
CIL Martin Ratio Rank: 95

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

QEFA vs. CIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF (QEFA) and VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	QEFA	CIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.45	2.29	-0.84
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.07	3.15	-1.07
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.54	-0.24
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.21	2.32	-0.11
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.40	15.10	-6.70
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QEFA vs. CIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QEFA Sharpe Ratio is 1.45, which is lower than the CIL Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QEFA and CIL, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QEFA	CIL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.45	2.29	-0.84
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.56	0.53	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.54	0.49	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.41	0.44	-0.03

Correlation

The correlation between QEFA and CIL is 0.72, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

QEFA vs. CIL - Dividend Comparison

QEFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.04%, more than CIL's 2.38% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QEFA SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF	3.04%	3.13%	3.17%	2.79%	3.02%	2.37%	1.82%	2.95%	3.22%	2.33%	2.01%	2.94%
CIL VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF	2.38%	2.70%	3.46%	2.91%	2.41%	3.04%	1.73%	2.69%	2.85%	2.17%	2.34%	0.43%

Drawdowns

QEFA vs. CIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QEFA drawdown since its inception was -31.71%, smaller than the maximum CIL drawdown of -36.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QEFA and CIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	QEFA	CIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.71%	-36.27%	+4.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.58%	-9.66%	+0.08%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.09%	-29.89%	+1.80%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-31.71%	-36.27%	+4.56%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.51%	-0.58%	-5.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.13%	-6.66%	+0.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.52%	1.73%	+0.79%

Volatility

QEFA vs. CIL - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF (QEFA) has a higher volatility of 6.47% compared to VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) at 0.00%. This indicates that QEFA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QEFA	CIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.47%	0.00%	+6.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.43%	5.76%	+3.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.36%	13.30%	+2.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.71%	16.67%	-1.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.00%	17.32%	-1.32%